Jul 8, 2013 5:00pm EDT
and to zimmerman's claim of self-defense. let's bring in our panel to assess what happened today. martin savidge is covering the trial for us. he's in sanford florida, together with cnn legal analyst together with former federal prosecutor sunny hostin and martin is joining us from miami. martin, this is all very dramatic and at least the sense was that the defense managed to counter some of the impressions left the other day when trayvon martin's mother and brother testified. they insisted that that voice screaming on that 911 call was the voice of trayvon martin. >> well, again, this was another really remarkable moment, wolf, inside of that courtroom. think about it. you have tracy martin, the father, who is called to the witness stand and questioned by the attorney who is defending the man who killed tracy martin's son. that's of course trayvon martin. so that unto itself sets up the drama. but then you have the issue of a father that is now, as you just pointed out, there were two detectives that took the stand and said unequivocally that they heard tracy martin when they asked him whose vo
Jul 9, 2013 5:00pm EDT
legal analyst, former federal prosecutor and cnn's martin savidge. this is obviously very important what the judge, debra nelson, is going to decide. what does it look like to you as a criminal defense attorney? do you think she's going to allow this animation to be shown to the jurors? because if it is, it could be in the words of some analysts out there potentially a bonanza for the defense. >> well, what we're looking at right now it doesn't look very good for the defense at this point. this witness -- now, when it comes to demonstrative evidence, florida law is very liberal when you're looking at opening statements and closing arguments because that's not evidence. but when you're actually trying to introduce something as evidence, evidence is very specific and must be very detailed, especially when you consider the appellate record that must be preserved. so in looking at this, this gentleman is testifying that he's basing a majority of this animation on consultation with the attorneys and not necessarily evidence that's actually been presented. i don't see how this works and i don'